It’s been almost three years now since Ukraine began its heroic and single-handed defense of the prosperous and hedonistic West from an invasion at the hands of 21st century barbarians. The entire “civilized world” has looked on as Ukraine bleeds out on the battlefield while these barbarians intend to humiliate and destroy this very same West.
Meanwhile, US administration officials and other Western politicians have held discussion after discussion over these three years to try to clarify just what their goal is in the Russo-Ukrainian war – a Victory for Ukraine or simply a No Defeat?
JOIN US ON TELEGRAM
Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.
The most common talking point we hear in these discussions amounts to a perpetual mantra more than anything else: “The most important thing to remember is that we must prevent this conflict from escalating. We must do all we can to keep it from turning into a regional war.”
While this pathetic blathering continues to fill the air, the West’s mortal enemies – the tyrannical regimes in Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China have managed to unleash World War IV against it. (With a personal stamp of approval from the UN General Secretary, incidentally)
It’s hard not to notice how invigorated the war criminal in Moscow has become of late after obtaining an almost unlimited (as many as the sands on the sounding shore*) supply of brainwashed potential soldiers to mobilize. They are straight out of Blok’s poem--the “slit-eyed greedy-looking Asians ready to burn our cities down and roast their white-skinned brethren alive.”
Thinking Out Loud – Where We’re at, What’s at Stake, and What Ronald Would Have Said
Putin’s latest escalation with North Korea serves as an inflection point within the current world war and reminds one of Stalin’s escalation with China in October 1950 during the Cold War (World War III). How the West and the Free World (if this term means anything at all anymore) choose to react to this escalation will determine both the outcome of the war and the course of history for the rest of the 21st century.
But first a few comments regarding the very nature of the Russo-Ukrainian war. The structure of the conflict is really a dynamic superposition of two very different wars. The first of these is a classic war of attrition along the thousand-kilometer line of contact between the two sides. Here theoretically Russia has the advantage due to two factors: its larger mobilization potential and the low value that Russian society places on human life. And now we have the Korean factor coming into play as well.
But the Russian military machine has one vulnerable area – the Crimean Peninsula. The struggle to control it constitutes, as Carl von Clausewitz put it, the psychological center of gravity of the entire Russo-Ukrainian war. Within this second component, Ukraine has already demonstrated a clear superiority. Without a navy or state-of-the-art aircraft, Ukraine managed to oust the Black Sea Fleet from Sevastopol and on a daily basis strikes Russian military targets throughout the peninsula.
So, Ukraine’s path to victory is a transparent and logical one:
The West must get rid of its most absurd red line, one we placed on ourselves: the requirement that any modern Western aircraft supplied to Ukraine be operated exclusively by pilots with Ukrainian passports. First of all, this restriction has prolonged an already devastating war for two years.
Secondly, if we continue to blindly adhere to it, the best we can hope for is 30-40 random airplanes, hardly a game-changer in this conflict.
In order to truly turn the tide in this conflict, Ukraine needs 150-200 aircrafts. Not just individual airplanes but cohesive squadrons of American F-16s and why not also Mirages from France, Typhoons from the UK, or Gripens from Sweden. Then Russia’s entire alignment of forces on the peninsula (not only the navy) will be withdrawn under threat of a long-range impending elimination.
The Ukrainian flag flying over Sevastopol would result in a catastrophic moral defeat for Russia, and, at the very least, the political death of the blood-sucker in the Kremlin.
This Victory Plan has support from France, the UK, and a bipartisan majority within the US Congress, both the outgoing one and the one to be elected on November 5th. Only Biden, Mr “We must prevent war at all costs!” is withholding his support.
With each passing day, Kamala Harris loses an opportunity to distance herself from the president on the issue of Ukraine (if nothing else, she should call for the ban on strikes on Russia’s interior to be lifted) and in so doing gain the support of a significant block of undecided Republican voters who are decisively pro-Ukraine. The proposals put forth by Trump and Vance do not bode well for Ukraine either.
The skies over Iran on the night of October 26th showed the world that the Horde’s air defense systems are generations inferior to the West’s state-of-the-art aviation. The fact remains that the West could simply snap its fingers and guarantee a victory for Ukraine, a victory it itself sorely needs. Instead, it forces Ukraine to shed even more rivers of blood in pursuit of joint victory for all. While they trod this heroic path, however, Ukrainians might simply cease to exist at all.
When the political situation becomes clearer in the US on November 6th, the collective West (including Ukraine) needs to come to a strategic decision.
Either Ukraine receives an air armada capable of liberating the Crimea or Ukraine is bound to agree to China/Brazil initiative: a cease-fire along the line of contact and the negotiations with Russia. Because without an air force, Ukraine’s position in a classic war of attrition will only worsen.
The key word in all this is “negotiations.” What Putin wants to negotiate is abundantly clear--the destruction of Ukrainian statehood and morphing a territorial entity with its capital in Kyiv (which he was unable to take in 7 or 1007 days) into a Russian protectorate. The achieving of this goal, as envisioned by the war criminal in the Kremlin, should be a key point of the agreement text. It would guarantee that Ukraine would remain utterly vulnerable in the face of a new round of aggression from Muscovy—“Ukraine will refrain from ever joining NATO.”
It seems that Putin is ready to make “concessions” on almost all other issues, including territorial ones. Because does it really matter for him if this or that Ukrainian oblast belongs explicitly to Muscovy or to the protectorate subordinate to it?
This is why Ukraine and the West, if they agree to the China/Brazil initiative, must unequivocally reject Putin’s Wishlist both de jure and de facto before engaging in any negotiations.
The best way to do this would be to offer Ukraine an immediate invitation to join NATO. This is a crucial procedural step which every applicant nation must take; after it is completed the admissions process is virtually irreversible.
As for how prepared Ukraine is to join the alliance, let us remember that Ukraine is the only nation in the world, in the 75-year history of the organization, that has been fulfilling the very function for which NATO was founded--the destruction of the Eurasian horde crashing towards civilized Europe.
But, wait, you say, if that happens Putin won’t agree to the China/Brazil initiative. No temporary gains in territory will mitigate one fundamental loss for him: Ukraine (even if it’s not the entire country’s territory for the time being) will have gone over for good to the West – to NATO and the EU. The tsar will automatically become a false one for his Z-blogosphere scum.
Ok, so say he doesn’t agree with the initiative. Then what can he do? Bring on ten or twenty thousand deranged Koreans and lead them to burn our cities down and roast their white-skinned brethren alive?
I think in this case, the “white-skinned brethren” in the White House will not wait around for a verbatim culmination of Blok’s prophecy and resolve, finally, to dispatch flight crews to Ukraine composed of volunteer pilots.
P.S. Several of these issues were discussed at the recent G4 summit in Berlin. A well informed source maintains that 25 of 32 NATO members are in favor of offering Ukraine an invitation to join the alliance right now. They are also in favor of letting Ukraine use Western pilots. The deciding negative vote came from the US.
As the discussions continued, the US softened its stance somewhat. Its representative made it known that if Harris won in November, he would side with the majority on both issues.
Why only if Harris wins, Mister President? If Trump wins, you will still be fully in charge for another two months or so. And you will then face a huge, epic responsibility. You will have to make an irreversible decision, one that obligates the next president and secures a victory for the Free World over the Empire of Absolute Evil.
In addition, you will have the opportunity to pass legislation codifying these decisions with the votes of the new Congress. This Congress will gather on Jan. 9, 2025, and retain a solid bipartisan, pro-Ukraine and pro-Israel majority.
And then, I assure you, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., your future Wikipedia page will be 90% devoted to the last two months of your lengthy political career.
*from Aleksandr Blok’s poem “The Scythians” (1918)
The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter
